Today AMD has released two new processors that address the AM3+ market. The FX-6350 and FX-4350 are two new refreshes of the quad and hex core lineup of processors. Currently the FX-8350 is still the fastest of the breed, and there is no update for that particular number yet. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but there are those of us who are still awaiting the arrival of the rumored “Centurion”.

These parts are 125 watt TDP units, which are up from their 95 watt predecessors. The FX-6350 runs at 3.9 GHz with a 4.2 GHz boost clock. This is up 300 MHz stock and 100 MHz boost from the previous 95 watt FX-6300. The FX-4350 runs at 3.9 GHz with a 4.3 GHz boost clock. This is 100 MHz stock and 300 MHz boost above that of the FX-4300. What is of greater interest here is that the L3 cache goes from 4 MB on the 4300 to 8 MB on the 4350. This little fact looks to be the reason why the FX-4350 is now a 125 watt TDP part.

It has been some two years since AMD started shipping 32 nm PD-SOI/HKMG products to the market, and it certainly seems as though spinning off GLOBALFOUNDRIES has essentially stopped the push to implement new features into a process node throughout the years. As many may remember, AMD was somewhat famous for injecting new process technology into current nodes to improve performance, yields, and power characteristics in “baby steps” type fashion instead of leaving the node as is and making a huge jump with the next node. Vishera has been out for some 7 months now and we have not really seen any major improvement in regards to performance and power characteristics. I am sure that yields and bins have improved, but the bottom line is that this is only a minor refresh and AMD raised TDPs to 125 watts for these particular parts.

The FX-6350 is again a three module part containing six cores. Each module features 2 MB of L2 cache for a total of 6 MB L2 and the entire chip features 8 MB of L3 cache. The FX-4350 is a two module chip with four cores. The modules again feature the same 2 MB of L2 cache for a total of 4 MB active on the chip with the above mentioned 8 MB of L3 cache that is double what the FX-4300 featured.

Perhaps soon we will see updates on FM2 with the Richland series of desktop processors, but for now this refresh is all AMD has at the moment. These are nice upgrades to the line. The FX-6350 does cost the same as the FX-6300, but the thinking behind that is that the 6300 is more “energy efficient”. We have seen in the past that AMD (and Intel for that matter) does put a premium on lower wattage parts in a lineup. The FX-4350 is $10 more expensive than the 4300. It looks as though the FX-6350 is in stock at multiple outlets but the 4350 has yet to show up.

These will fit in any modern AM3+ motherboard with the latest BIOS installed. While not an incredibly exciting release from AMD, it at least shows that they continue to address their primary markets. AMD is in a very interesting place, and it looks like Rory Read is busy getting the house in order. Now we just have to see if they can curve back their cost structure enough to make the company more financially stable. Indications are good so far, but AMD has a long ways to go. But hey, at least according to AMD the FX series is beloved!

More MHz for the Masses

AMD has had a rough time of it lately when it comes to CPUs. Early last year when we saw the performance of the low power Bobcat architecture, we thought 2011 would be a breakout year for AMD. Bulldozer was on the horizon and it promised performance a step above what Intel could offer. This harkened back to the heady days of the original Athlon and Athlon 64 where AMD held a performance advantage over all of Intel’s parts. On the graphics side AMD had just released the 6000 series of chips, all of which came close in performance to NVIDIA’s Fermi architecture, but had a decided advantage in terms of die size and power consumption. Then the doubts started to roll in around the April timeframe. Whispers hinted that Bulldozer was delayed, and not only was it delayed it was not meeting performance expectations.

The introduction of the first Llano products did not help things. The “improved” CPU performance was less than expected, even though the GPU portion was class leading. The manufacturing issues we saw with Llano did not bode well for AMD or the upcoming Bulldozer products. GLOBALFOUNDRIES was simply not able to achieve good yields on these new 32 nm products. Then of course the hammer struck. Bulldozer was released, well behind schedule, and with performance that barely rose above that of the previous Phenom II series of chips. The top end FX-8150 was competitive with the previous Phenom II X6 1100T, but it paled in comparison to the Intel i7 2600 which was right around the same price range.